In the not-so-far future the polar ice caps have melted and the resulting rise of the ocean waters has drowned all the coastal cities of the world. Withdrawn to the interior of the continents, the human race keeps advancing, reaching the point of creating realistic robots (called mechas) to serve them. One of the mecha-producing companies builds David, an artificial kid which is the first to have real feelings, especially a never-ending love for his "mother", Monica. Monica is the woman who adopted him as a substitute for her real son, who remains in cryo-stasis, stricken by an incurable disease. David is living happily with Monica and her husband, but when their real son returns home after a cure is discovered, his life changes dramatically.Written by
Chris Makrozahopoulos <makzax@hotmail.com>
"[The Mechas of AI: Artificial Intelligence] were unlike anything audiences had seen before," said Winston, "and we were able to do it by using all of the available technologies." From live-action puppetry to traditional makeups and Practical/CGI hybrid approaches, the Stan Winston Studio robot makers pushed themselves to a brand new level of innovation by bringing every magic trick to the table, all to help Steven Spielberg make his modern day Pinocchio a reality. See more »
Goofs
Monica takes David to the forest to abandon him. While she is telling him her plan, the sun is shining brightly on David's head and hair when the camera angle is showing Monica's face. However, whenever David's face is shown, his head is in shadow. See more »
Quotes
[first lines]
Narrator:
[narrating, with ocean waves crashing together]
Those were the years after the ice caps had melted... because of the greenhouse gases, and the oceans had risen drown so many cities... along all the shorelines of the world. Amsterdam, Venice, New York - Forever lost. Millions of people were displaced. Climates became chaotic. Hundreds of millions of people starved in poorer countries. Elsewhere a high degree of prosperity survived... when most governments in the developed world... ...
See more »
Crazy Credits
Sentient Machine Therapist ... JEANINE SALLA Assistant to Mr. Chan ... LAIA SALLA Toe-Bell Ringer ... KATE NEI Cybertronics - Room 93056 ... CLAUDE GILBERT Sentient Machine Security ... DIANE FLETCHER Covert Information Retrieval ... RED KING These are characters from the AI alternate-reality game that was connected to the release of the film, and was played over the Internet. Several of the TV and cinema trailers for AI contained clues for game players, including the name Jeanine Salla listed in the credits at the end of the first trailer. This was the way into the game. The room number given in Claude Gilbert's credit is a further clue to game players. See more »
Alternate Versions
For the U.S. theatrical release, the Warner Bros. logo appeared before the Dreamworks logo at the beginning of the film, and the poster credits said, "Warner Bros. and Dreamworks Pictures present." Since the U.S. version's home video/DVD rights are owned by Dreamworks, the Dreamworks logo at the beginning of the movie appears before the Warner Bros. logo, and the back of the box's cover art says, "Dreamworks Pictures and Warner Bros. present." See more »
If I were to rate the first Act of A.I., I would have given it 4 stars. This act was the only place in A.I. that Stanley Kubrick had obviously influenced. If Kubrick had any influence on the rest of the movie then it doesn't show. The Prologue (where William Hurts character is proposing the new form of A.I.) is similar to such prologues from Paths of Glory and The Shining. A scene where no action occurs, but the ideas presented are what draws the viewer into the story line. I thought the first Act was amazing. Kubrick's adult content shows through Speilberg's childish method of filming and scriptwriting. Unfortunately, there wasn't any credibility or coherency for the rest of the film. When Davie reaches "The End of the World", where does Gigolo Joe, and Teddy go? Then William Hurts character arrives (for no good narrative reason) only to disappear for no reason. Then Gigolo Joe returns. Where the hell has he been? Was he off exploring for himself? More importantly what was Gigolo Joe's purpose for this film? What's the purpose of having a "love" bot in this film? Couldn't it have been any other type of robot? Speilberg's script offers no answers for these questions. Obviously, Stanley Kubrick wanted a robot that was programmed to love gets attached to a robot that programmed to "love". This use of the word "love" would create questions like "what is love, co-dependency, lust, and selfishness". A.I. starts these ideas, but it never finishes them. The end of Act three would have been a good place to end the movie. Instead we had to endure the forth Act. Most movies don't have a forth act. Coincidentally, 2001: A Space Odyssey does. Was Spielberg trying to achieve the same type of ending as 2001? They are similar in that both movies go on a journey only to come back to a familiar place. (This is also what Carl Sagan's Contact did) I suppose there is a possibility that a forth act could have worked, but this one didn't. Without going into too much detail, but the ending had no credibility, it dragged on, it was superficial, and it served no narrative purpose other than to give a happy ending. And why do these beings have the capability to bring back the mom for 24 hours, but not more time? Why just 24 hours? Does that make any sense to anyone out there? These super-beings also reminded me of Mr. DNA from Jurassic Park. Teddy says: "I have a piece of Mommy's hair" and the super-being should have said: "BINGO! Instant Mommy DNA!" Perhaps then they could have opened HUMAN PARK and then the movie could have truly dragged on forever torturing us all. Finally, If someone could bring Stanley Kubrick back for 24 hours, would he watch A.I. and be happy?
4 of 5 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this
If I were to rate the first Act of A.I., I would have given it 4 stars. This act was the only place in A.I. that Stanley Kubrick had obviously influenced. If Kubrick had any influence on the rest of the movie then it doesn't show. The Prologue (where William Hurts character is proposing the new form of A.I.) is similar to such prologues from Paths of Glory and The Shining. A scene where no action occurs, but the ideas presented are what draws the viewer into the story line. I thought the first Act was amazing. Kubrick's adult content shows through Speilberg's childish method of filming and scriptwriting. Unfortunately, there wasn't any credibility or coherency for the rest of the film. When Davie reaches "The End of the World", where does Gigolo Joe, and Teddy go? Then William Hurts character arrives (for no good narrative reason) only to disappear for no reason. Then Gigolo Joe returns. Where the hell has he been? Was he off exploring for himself? More importantly what was Gigolo Joe's purpose for this film? What's the purpose of having a "love" bot in this film? Couldn't it have been any other type of robot? Speilberg's script offers no answers for these questions. Obviously, Stanley Kubrick wanted a robot that was programmed to love gets attached to a robot that programmed to "love". This use of the word "love" would create questions like "what is love, co-dependency, lust, and selfishness". A.I. starts these ideas, but it never finishes them. The end of Act three would have been a good place to end the movie. Instead we had to endure the forth Act. Most movies don't have a forth act. Coincidentally, 2001: A Space Odyssey does. Was Spielberg trying to achieve the same type of ending as 2001? They are similar in that both movies go on a journey only to come back to a familiar place. (This is also what Carl Sagan's Contact did) I suppose there is a possibility that a forth act could have worked, but this one didn't. Without going into too much detail, but the ending had no credibility, it dragged on, it was superficial, and it served no narrative purpose other than to give a happy ending. And why do these beings have the capability to bring back the mom for 24 hours, but not more time? Why just 24 hours? Does that make any sense to anyone out there? These super-beings also reminded me of Mr. DNA from Jurassic Park. Teddy says: "I have a piece of Mommy's hair" and the super-being should have said: "BINGO! Instant Mommy DNA!" Perhaps then they could have opened HUMAN PARK and then the movie could have truly dragged on forever torturing us all. Finally, If someone could bring Stanley Kubrick back for 24 hours, would he watch A.I. and be happy?